Talk:Passer (river)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Passer (river) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Rivers Low‑importance

	Geography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Italy Low‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

English name[edit]

It seems that the name "Passirio" is more commonly used in English than "Passer" (passirio river: 597 hits; passer river: 272 hits). It is better to leave the article where it is at this moment.--Suppar luca 09:18, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Passeier Valley, I'll move the page according to the NC. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 02:22, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Google Scholar: 3 hits for passirio (the other hits are Italian books vs 3 hits for "Passer river"

Google Books: 32 hits for "passirio river" vs 67 hits for "passer river"

In fact, there is no widely used English name for this small river, so the name of the local majority should be given preference. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 13:14, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

btw: This link shows me 517 hits for Passirio River and not 597... --Mai-Sachme (talk) 20:41, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From Wikipedia:Naming conflict:

A number of methods can be used to identify which of a pair (or more) conflicting names is the most prevalent in English.

The Google test. Using Google's advanced search option, search for each conflicting name and confine the results to pages written in English; also exclude the word "Wikipedia" (as we want to see what other people are using, not our own usage). Note which is the most commonly used term.

International organisations. Search for the conflicting names on the websites of organisations such as the United Nations, NATO, OSCE, IMF, etc.

Major English-language media outlets. Use Google News and, where possible, the archives of major outlets such as BBC News and CNN to identify common usages. Some media organisations have established style guides covering naming issues, which can provide useful guidance (e.g. The Guardian's style guide says use Ukraine, not the Ukraine).

Reference works. Check other encyclopedias. If there is general agreement on the use of a name (as there often will be), that is usually a good sign of the name being the preferred term in English.

Geographic name servers. Check geographic name servers such as the NGIA GNS server at http://gnswww.nga.mil/geonames/GNS/index.jsp .

Scientific nomenclature. Check usage by international bodies like CIPM, IUPAP, IUPAC, and other scientific bodies concerned with nomenclature; consider also the national standards agencies NIST and NPL. Consult style guides of scientific journals.

Google test: passirio river: 509 hits; passer river: 286 hits.
International organisations:
Major English-language media outlets: Google news: passirio river: 7 hits; passer river: 4 hits.
Reference works:
Geographic name servers: The NGIA GNS server finds "Passirio" and "Passer" as a variant; TGN uses passirio.
Scientific nomenclature:

By the way, Google Book: passirio river 28 hits, passer river 21 hits, and Google Scholar: passirio river: 2 hits, passer river: 2 hits. Don't move pages without reasons and without discussing it first.--Suppar luca 13:40, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For Supparluca from the Naming Conventions: There are cases in which the local authority recognizes equally two or more names from different languages, but English discussion of the place is so limited that none of the above tests indicate which of them is widely used in English; so there is no single local name, and English usage is hard to determine.

The usual Google test doesn't bear even a 2:1 ratio, all together we have less than 1000 hits. The other hits show an almost equal ratio. So, given that we are far from having a widely used English name, we use the name of the local majority. The precendent ist Passeier Valley. Please don't move pages against the Naming Conventions. You have to prove first that there is a widely used English name for this small river in the mountains. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 14:25, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, and you should stop to manipulate your google results with date restrictions...29 for Passirio River vs 60 for Passer River and 2 for Passirio River vs 3 for Passer River --Mai-Sachme (talk) 16:19, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Move?[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was No move Parsecboy (talk) 00:51, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The first 3 messages in this discussion were moved from Wikipedia:Requested moves. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:25, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Passer (river) → Passirio — The article was recently moved without discussion from a long established name (30 August 2007 by an admin), and probably against WP:UE. — Suppar luca 14:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is well known that Supparluca doesnot accept the Naming Conventions, if they disagree with his POV, in this case we have no widely used English name (see talk page), so it is good practise in the area of the Province of Bolzano-Bozen to use the name of the local majority. The precedent is Passeier Valley. And by the way: It is quite brazen to list this move request under Uncontroversial requests... --Mai-Sachme (talk) 14:51, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, Supparluca is constantly pushing name changes that are absurd – i.e. trying to apply the naming convention for geographical names to newspapers! [1]. Furthermore his constant gaming of google results until they meet his POV is tendentious: i.e his results: passirio river 28 hits, passer river 21 hits, without the date restriction passirio river 29 hits, passer river 60 hits. On top of that I doubt that 500 results are tantamount to a "widely used English name", especially as the only good English sources in the first 50 results of Passirio River is The Spectator and for Passer River are Frommer's and the European Research Academy. This move request is anything, but uncontroversial! --noclador (talk) 15:29, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, not at all uncontroversial. See also Passeier Valley for consistency. Since the valley is German-speaking, and there is no wide English usage one way or another, naming conventions apply, that is the local name is to be preferred. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 18:00, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. These changes make me sick and are sensless since I also prefer the name used by the vast majority of the local popuulation!--Moroderen (talk) 15:42, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. See naming conventions. -- PhJ (talk) 21:48, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No - no English name as such, and the present name seems to be the one mostly used locally. HeartofaDog (talk) 00:40, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.